so I've read some about this, not everything, but what the board could decide is to settle this with Apple, that would be additional income for them ...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Watch Sales Ban Reinstated in U.S. Effective Tomorrow
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The requirement is for new apple watches to be better than older ones.
The only way for that to happen is for apple to remove O2 functionality from the older watches - thereby breaching consumer protection laws.
That's what I think might be happening behind the scenes. The CEO, if I had to guess from everything I've read, has been hoping for a huge windfall victory from Apple, and has refused to negotiate in good faith. Which has harmed Masimo shareholders. This is why the CEO put in the poison pill, so that Apple would have to eat a huge payment directly to the CEO, taking that money away from the shareholders. Thus the institutional investors in Masimo are angry. But that's a lot of speculation still on my part.
It’s objectively worse for customers, shareholders and management if apple is paying for something it believes they do have to.
As far as lightning vs usb I dislike the usb connector on my 15pm. And objectively spent $$$ to buy cables and adapters. Was definitely ok with apple staying with lightning.
Many lawsuits run on pure emotion. Hey...you took some of our staff. Hey we think you should have paid us for that tech....let's sue. Apple has done it...sued purely based on emotion like Steve Jobs and Microsoft garbage can. The CEOs get so self-righteous whether they are right/wrong/ridiculous.
well, that is your opinion ...
Apple removing SpO2 functionality from existing watches just is not going to happen.
wasn't suggesting that, just that BODs are not necessarily rational either ...
I still need to get a battery replacement on my Series 6 watch. I guess that will remain paused until this is all straightened out.
If they choose to remove the sensor and/or software altogether on new models, I wonder if they'll start sending back a refurbished watch without anything related to Blood Oxygen for all repairs of watches previously sold with the sensor.
If they choose to remove the sensor and/or software altogether on new models, I wonder if they'll start sending back a refurbished watch without anything related to Blood Oxygen for all repairs of watches previously sold with the sensor.
So is it your opinion that apple will want to sell a new apple watch that is worse than the older ones?
That's not going to happen
Seems the Biden administration has a bone to pick with Apple
The Biden administration should have nothing whatsoever to do with this case.
The president doesn't decide for the courts.
You’re right. I was looking at the wrong time period for the high/low values.
As you suggest, the fall in their stock price in 2022 seems mostly related to their acquisition of Sounds United (Bowers & Wilkins, Denon, Marantz, Polk Audio, etc), however, not the Apple lawsuit.
I agree but with an impending DOJ anti-trust case coming against Apple you have to wonder.
Love this. I hope Apple get smacked around; I'm tired of their bullying tactics.
Three options:
A) Pay via class action for disabling the sensor
B) Pay for the patent
C) Stall and buy time until they can develop their own non-infringing sensor & code
A) Pay via class action for disabling the sensor
B) Pay for the patent
C) Stall and buy time until they can develop their own non-infringing sensor & code
yeah, that was the big drop. That said, the proxy fight was in part over this:
If you're interested, here's a link to the Deck that Politan Capital created in prep for the Proxy fight, which they won.
Apple will just remove the app from the watch until the dust settles, then notify owners that it's available on the App Store. I have a 7, and it works, sort of…About 3/4 of the time, it just says it can't get a reading.
Claiming the Masimo CEO is not behaving in “good faith” is patently absurd (pun intended). Masimo initiated all attempts to collaborate. Apple refused to even reply. We need more of companies looking for collaboration rather than jumping right to lawsuits.
Apple just keeps taking hit after hit in government and court battles lately. Supreme Court rejecting their appeal. New EU regulations. The Masimo case here. Wonder what's next.
You don't know any of that for certain. Nor do I. All I know is that Masimo's own investors and board have been concerned, and the CEO is in hot water with his own board and investors. Masimo has spent $100 million on this litigation. After everything I've read, the only conclusion that makes sense to me is that the CEO hasn't been negotiating in good faith; despite what he said to a reporter on a business news program.
Does Masimo just get to say any number they feel like? Or do we have lots of other factors that need to be looked at 🤔